When “delivery problems” are actually organized fraud: A wake-up call for Nordic e-commerce

Imagine you run an online shop in Stockholm or Copenhagen. Every month, a small fraction of orders seem to “go missing” in transit – packages mysteriously untraceable or carriers failing to deliver. Many merchants sigh and chalk up a 2–3% lost orders rate as a cost of doing business.

But what if those “delivery problems” are not random at all, but the handiwork of organized fraud rings?

Recent industry reports and analyses warn that criminal groups are systematically abusing carriers and merchant policies to steal merchandise and trigger chargebacks.

• Signifyd, a commerce-protection firm, cautions that fraud rings have “stolen billions of dollars in goods” from online brands.
• A UK support guide notes the scale: in 2024 UK merchants lost £1.17 billion to e-commerce fraud, with Europe accounting for about 26% of global losses.
• Friendly (“first-party”) fraud – where the buyer deceptively claims “I never got my order” – now drives a large slice of these losses. Intellicheck explains friendly fraud as 'when a customer falsely disputes a charge by claiming they didn’t receive the product'. In other words, your “unlucky” customer might not be unlucky at all. 

Before panic takes hold, remember this blog is about solutions. We’re not peddling fear-mongering; we’re giving SMBs a reality check and practical steps. Think of it like a detective story (or a Rory Sutherland twist): instead of hypnosis or gamification, our magic lies in data patterns and careful questions. Throughout, we’ll question assumptions, test our logic, and back every insight with industry research. The goal is to help European e-commerce teams spot when delivery issues are a symptom of fraud, and then take action.

The case of the “unlucky” customer: Multiple lost-order claims

Which customers are truly unlucky, and which are fraudsters in disguise? A quick data query can make this clear: list all buyers who filed two or more “lost package” claims in the past year. In honest commerce, such luck is statistically improbable: even if a customer is forgetful or unlucky, losing two deliveries from separate orders is rare. Fraudsters, by contrast, will reuse identities to suck out free merchandise. 

Consider this: Intellicheck’s fraud primer notes that in friendly fraud, customers may claim “no delivery” as an excuse. However, professional scammers don’t stop at one story – they run what are essentially small businesses themselves. Nordic police reports explicitly describe many ecommerce fraudsters as “repeat offenders”, often acting across borders. In one case study of return-abuse schemes, a single “customer” had five different accounts on an online store, using each to get refunds for products they never returned – a pattern that “should raise alarm bells”.

In practice, if the same name (or email, phone number, etc.) pops up repeatedly in lost-package reports, treat it as a red flag. Even better, automate it: set a rule in your CRM or fraud-detection tool to tag buyers with multiple lost-delivery claims. If you find Alice or Bob with 3+ such claims, you’re almost certainly looking at abuse. (Retailers often watch for “stacking” of returns or claims, and you should do the same for shipment claims.)

High stakes: Are expensive orders disappearing disproportionately?

Fraudsters are in business to make money – they target the big ticket. A savvy criminal ring won’t bother with cheap knick-knacks; they’ll go after high-value electronics, jewelry or branded goods. So ask: are your priciest orders “lost” more often than the cheap ones? 

One way to see this is to slice your data by order value. Compare the loss rate (lost vs. successful deliveries) for orders above a threshold (e.g. €200) to those below (e.g. €50). If the high-value bin has a much higher “loss” percentage, that’s not coincidence. An e-commerce fraud guide notes that “multiple high-value purchases in short timeframes” – especially with other odd patterns – often indicate fraud. Similarly, LexisNexis’ fraud study finds that the cost of fraud is far higher in digital channels (where expensive items move online) – merchants spend about $3 fighting fraud for every $1 lost (covering refunds, reshipping, fees, etc). In short, criminals go where the profit is. 

Real-world example: suppose your store sells both €50 mugs and €500 headphones. If you see 5 lost-headphone claims and zero lost-mug claims in a month, that’s a sign of a targeted scam. Legit customers returning a faulty mug now and then wouldn’t cluster like that. Use dashboards or simple spreadsheets to check loss rates by price bracket. If the top-tier goods are vanishing at 4% while cheap items hold steady at 0.5%, dig deeper – you’re likely being scoped out.

One address, many problems: Patterns in shipping destinations

Next, look at the delivery addresses behind those lost or stolen orders. If you discover that one address has had multiple problem shipments (even under different customer names), that’s very suspicious. Fraud rings often use the same drop-off “hub” – whether it’s a network of friends, a rental lockbox or a reshipping service – to collect stolen goods. 

Research by Signifyd details how fraud networks rely on “mules” and “reshippers.” A mule is simply someone (knowingly or unknowingly) who takes delivery for the fraudsters and then forwards the package on. Signifyd explains that fraud rings will ship stolen orders initially to a mule’s address (often the billing address of a real cardholder) and then reroute them via lockers, PO boxes or other intermediaries. In larger schemes, “reshippers” (essentially freight-forwarders) are employed: crooks bundle multiple stolen orders to one forwarding agent and have them sent overseas. The key point: fraudsters reuse drop locations – not the “lost package” stories being random noise. 

Actionable step: pull all your “lost/damaged” orders and group them by shipping address. See if any address or PO box appears 3 or 4 times. If so, treat that like a screaming alarm. It might be a known bad-actor location. Even slight variations (“123 Main St” vs “123 Main St Apt 1A”) could be the same physical spot with bait-and-switch text. (Fraudsters have been caught inserting random strings or character swaps to game automated address-checkers. If the same drop point keeps losing multiple packages, it’s almost certainly a fraud drop-off. 

Hostile vs. helpful: The customer’s reaction to verification

How does your customer service team feel when they start asking for proof or details about a missing order? Normal, honest customers want their items delivered – they’ll usually cooperate if you ask a few verification questions. A professional scammer often does not. If a buyer snaps back, “Why do you need more info? Just refund me now!” or otherwise gets defensive, that’s another red flag. 

This is not just conjecture. E-commerce fraud experts note that scammers “struggle to answer basic questions” about their orders or personal info. In other words, a real customer will calmly explain the situation, provide tracking numbers, or recall details. A fraudster often can’t remember exactly what was ordered, when, or who paid for it. Chargeflow (a chargeback management firm) even advises requiring verified delivery confirmation and signatures on high-value packages to force scammers to engage truthfully. If a customer balks at simple questions or acts belligerent, flag it internally.

Train your team: if the person on the line immediately jumps to demands or aggression (“just send a new one!”), that matches the profile of “hostile” or true fraud, not a puzzled legitimate shopper. 

The policy expert: Quoting your small-print

Finally, pay attention when customers quote your own policies back to you, word-for-word. It sounds almost helpful, but it can be a sign they have studied your return/shipping terms to exploit them. In normal use, most buyers don’t memorize the exact phrasing of “lost in transit” clauses or refund rules. If someone references your policy language verbatim, that likely means they dug it up intentionally. 

Security teams warn that savvy fraudsters often know merchant policies inside-out. In one fraud intelligence interview, experts note that “serial fraudsters know e-commerce merchants… have siloed data…and use this knowledge to exploit return and warranty policies”. They literally game the system by finding loopholes in the words you’ve written. So if a customer says “According to Section 4.3 of your shipping policy, you must refund me,” or even casually parrots your FAQ wording, be cautious. It’s a classic trait of an abuser reading the fine print for loopholes. 

A note on verification: Some guidelines suggest using “order verification questions” – e.g. asking for a piece of information only the real payer would know (edesk.com). That’s another strong tactic. But when the scammer already knows your policy text, it’s a hint they’re on offense.

What you’ll discover if you dig

After asking these questions, many merchants have an epiphany: patterns emerge. Often the same names and addresses pop up in multiple suspicious orders. Your priciest products show the strange loss spikes. A handful of customers exhibit almost all the red flags. In short, the money lost to these “delivery issues” is usually much higher than you thought, and much of it is preventable. One telling stat: Juniper Research estimates U.S. e-tailers lost about $48 billion to fraud last year. If even a small fraction of that came from “lost packages,” the hole in your profit-and-loss could be big. 

Crucially, attackers prefer easier targets. Large retailers have entire fraud departments and sophisticated detection. Small and medium shops don’t – making you a juicy mark. The Nordic fraud assessment reinforces this: buyers with stolen or fake accounts easily slip past lean fraud controls. If you’re seeing just 1% of revenue vanish in claims, do the math. For a €2 million turnover, 3% equates to €60k lost. Perhaps €40k of that could be fraud, enough to pay a specialist’s salary. That’s not a rounding error – it’s a cash cow for criminals if unaddressed. And it’s money you desperately need. 

Why SMBs in Europe are particularly at risk 

Pan-European e-commerce has boomed, especially in tech-savvy Nordics. This means more cross-border deliveries, mobile wallets, and digital shipping. But it also offers more loopholes. For example, the region’s wealth and trust levels make phishing/identity theft a big vector. A Nordic police report confirms many fraudsters are local young men exploiting tight digital networks across countries. They’re not just random amateurs – some have links to organized crime groups. Meanwhile, small retailers often rely on standard carrier services and lack custom fraud analytics. 

The good news: Awareness is the first defense. Once you know these patterns, you gain power. Major carriers actually recommend getting signed proof of delivery on expensive items, or using trusted logistics partners for high-value/ cross-border shipments. Offer customers strong tracking and clear communication to make it harder for a scammer to fake ignorance. Train your CS team – they’re your eyes and ears. If anything feels off, escalate it. And consider joining or building a merchant network where you share fraud indicators (some platforms do this “team up” to block known fraudsters). 

Actionable takeaways 

• Track the suspects: Query your order database for customers with ≥2 lost-package claims in 12 months. Tag and closely review any such accounts. 
  

• Segment by value: Compare delivery-loss rates across different order values. Spike in losses at the high end? Investigate those orders and customers separately. 
  

• Map problem addresses: Group “lost/damaged” orders by shipping address. If one location (or variation of it) recurs, treat it as a hot spot. Cross-check it on Google Maps or USPS – it may not even be a residence, but a commercial address or C/O location. 
  

• Train CS on tone: Instruct your support team to watch the customer’s attitude. If verification requests (like sending tracking info or ID) trigger hostility, mark that order as suspicious. Legit buyers generally want to solve the problem. 
  

• Policy awareness: Note any customer quoting your exact “lost in transit” or refund policy language. In practice, require any policy-based refund claim to go through additional review. 
  

Conclusion: Break the cycle 

For too long, many e-commerce folks have accepted some delivery failures as “normal.” But as fraud experts emphasize, organized scams are the real culprit – and they can be stopped. As Signifyd warns, these are “large criminal enterprises” plotting multi-million-dollar raids. We all need to be just as systematic. 

By turning these five questions into standard checks, you’ll transform “something’s wrong” gut feelings into data-driven alerts. The patterns will speak: repeated names, targeted items, strained customers – they won’t lie. And once you spot the scheme, you can tighten processes (e.g. require signatures, tweak return rules, block risky buyers) to save those tens of thousands of euros. 

Stop accepting loss without question. Instead, treat each delivery problem as a detective puzzle. A quick chat with your customer support team or a 30-minute report could reveal a fraud ring in the act. These findings aren’t theoretical – they’re based on documented fraud ring behaviors (signifyd.com, riskified.com). Stay vigilant, use the data, and reclaim those “lost” profits. Your P&L (and honest customers) will thank you. 

Sources: Industry fraud studies and reports were used to verify patterns of parcel/return fraud, friendly fraud tactics, and detection strategies. These ideas are drawn from leading fraud-prevention experts to help Nordic/EU merchants. For brevity, only key references were cited.